Caydel’s SEO Blog

Yes, you read that right.

I just stumbled upon an interesting/funny/scary piece by Damien Mulley entitles, ‘How to Use Google to Get a Girl and Get Laid‘. In it, Damien describes all types of different ways you can use Google’s various services to meet women. Such as buying .com and using Adwords to bid on therms such as ‘Mr. Right’. Or using Google Base to search the personals for ‘desperate women’. Only as a last resort, of course.

Share This

It has long been a question asked tongue in cheek - Sex, or Chocolate?

For a definitive response, I turned to Google Trends. Sex is in blue, Chocolate is in red.

As you can see, sex is by far more important to Google users than chocolate. Looking a bit more into it, I decided to see how money stacked up. Once again Sex is in blue, Money is in red:

Once again, we can see that sex is even more important than money. So, now I guess we really know what drives society!

Share This

I just got this by way of Google Blogoscoped…

If you visit Google Suggest and type ‘ple’ into the search box, you get a fun result popping up…

If you find this funny, digg it!

Share This

FOR THOSE COMING FROM REDDIT, READ THE EXPLANATION BELOW BEFORE YOU VISIT THE VIDEO:
If you look at the tags associated with Matt’s video here, you will see that someone has managed to get it associated with the Gay Porn tag. Is this a joke by an SEO or fellow Google Employee? Other attached tags include ‘Shoemoney was here’, ‘umpa umpa love’, ‘gilligan’ and more.

I think this is bloody hilarious. Obviously, someone has a great sense of humour, and couldn’t resist the opportunity to poke one at Matt. To whoever did this, great job!

Check out the Matt Cutts Video on Google Video Tagged as Gay Porn

digg story

Share This

Last night, Rand Fishkin wrote an interesting article on the SEOmoz blog regarding the necessity of having proper search data and the inadequacy of the existing search APIs from the major search engines. He then explains the resulting need to scrape to get accurate data, and follows that up with the consequences of scraping, both for the scraper, and for the search engine being scraped.

I think that representatives from the big engines really should read this - it provides compelling reasons to update and ‘fix’ their broken/poorly implemented APIs. The data they can give is extremely valuable to companies, to the point that if necessary, many companies would be more than willing to pay for it.

At any rate, Rand provides a great listing of the important APIs, and great descriptions of their function. In addition, he makes some great suggestions about how such engines should be improved. Definately go read the article!

Share This

According to a recent article at Infoworld, Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt is hastily reassuring their users that they would not have the type of security breach recently experienced by AOL.

“Our number one priority is the trust our users have in us,” Schmidt said, speaking at a press conference during the Search Engine Strategies (SES) conference in San Jose, California. “The answer is, it won’t happen.”

Of course Google is making a statement like this - people are worried, with their deep, dark secrets held out to dry. The data released by AOL exposed the darker intents of many people - there were searches for the effects of incest, related to searches of teenage motherhood. There were searches for pictures of dead people, and searches for how to murder a wife or lover. And beyond all this, these searches are occasionally linked to real people, through searches for social security numbers, or searches for the names of themselves or people they know.

Now, I wouldn’t never say that I prefer that data which could help prevent a murder from becoming available, but there were hundreds of thousands of other searches in there, many which people would rather not have made public.

But I won’t get into this too much farther - millions of other blogs have already been over it. Rather, to get back to Google’s statement, two thoughts come to mind.

1. Google can’t predict it. AOL’s move was so stupid, I am sure the people in charge would have said they wouldn’t have made such a move either. It only takes a small subset of employees to make something like this happen. In a company as large as Google, their are many thosands of sets of employees. For Google to claim that they will never experience a similar security speach is mighty pretentious.
2. This really seems like a subtle dig at AOL. Of course, it is well deserved by AOL. Underneath Schmidt’s political words, there is a sharp edge. Every positive thing he says is aimed to also subtly imply the opposite about AOL.

At any rate, we can only hope nothing like this happens again; Google, with it’s vastly superior search volume, could potentially expose even more user’s private matters.

If you are interested in viewing the AOL data, it is available here.

Share This

A couple of months ago, George Boone wrote an interesting piece on the Irrelevancy of SEO. I just read it, and it has made me think a bit. I think I may try the same tack he mentioned in his article with this blog. I am not going to worry about search engine traffic. I am just going to work with links, word of mouth, and other tactics, to see what kind of traffic I get.

Anyone interested in SEO, marketing, and traffic building should read that article - it’s one of the better ones I’ve read in a while.

edit: I didn’t see that article on digg anywhere, so I went to submit it. I got a message back: URL is on the ban list. I wonder why?

Share This